The UN's Iraqnophobia

February 16, 2003

On Friday, as the world looked in on the UN Security Council, diplomats from several countries--notably France, China and Russia--could be seen tiptoeing around Resolution 1441, in which the UN had demanded immediate, active and unconditional cooperation from Iraq to disarm.

The diplomats seemed to cover their ears when inspectors tallied the scorecard: some 400 inspections at more than 300 sites, no weapons to speak of; one 12,000-page "declaration" of mainly rehash and obfuscation; tons of chemical and biological weapons still unaccounted for.

In other words, nothing much has changed.

The updated reports by UN weapons inspection leaders Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei exposed the fault lines more starkly than ever between those countries that still hope Saddam Hussein may one day wake up and decide to cooperate, and those who believe, as Blix said a few days ago, that it is "five minutes to midnight" for Hussein.

There's no doubt the clock is winding down. The only question now is whether the UN will find its spine in time to do something about Saddam's continued defiance, or will stand by and watch a United States-led coalition do the job.

Even Blix, who seemed to take pains to praise Iraq for appearing to finally cooperate on some procedural matters, dryly suggested that a period of disarmament "could still be short, if immediate, active and unconditional cooperation from Iraq were forthcoming." In other words: Get with the program, Saddam.

Instead, Iraq has grudgingly yielded on some minor matters, allowing overflights of surveillance aircraft--with conditions attached--and allegedly encouraging scientists to spill their weapons secrets. But these are inconsequential compared to the glaring fact thatSaddam's game of deny, deceive and delay is still humming along. Unlike nations such as South Africa that have agreed to disarm, Iraq has led inspectors to not a single weapon. Instead, it has spent all of its efforts hiding or moving its weapons, making a mockery of the process.

There is much at stake in the next few days and weeks, not the least of which is the credibility of the UN. The resolution adopted Nov. 8, remember, was "a final opportunity" for Iraq to disarm.

Now the world must ask those who favor endless more months of futile inspections: When does "final" mean final? Or, as President Bush said Thursday, "The decision is this for the United Nations: When you say something does it mean anything?" In the Security Council's action--or inaction--the world soon will discover the answer to that question.